2

SUDAN/SOUTH SUDAN SYMPOSIUM

Centre for Refugee Studies, York University

July 3rd – July 5th, 2013

The Conference Centre, 519 Kaneff Tower, York University

EVALUATION REPORT*

Introduction and Background to the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium

The Sudan/South Sudan Symposium was a three-day event that took place from Wednesday, July 3rd to Friday, July 5th, 2013 at the York University Kaneff Tower. This three-day symposium was an international collaborative project initiated by the Centre for Refugee Studies (CRS) at York University in Canada, the Global Collaboration Centre (GLOCOL) at Osaka University in Japan, and the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law in Heidelberg, Germany, and was a response to the ongoing armed conflicts, extreme violence, and the resulting mass forced displacements that are taking place in Sudan and in South Sudan.

The UNHCR has reported that most of the world’s refugees are a consequence of armed conflict and that about 55% of the world’s refugees today come from just five countries: Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Syria, and Sudan alone.[footnoteRef:1] With no internal or external safety networks to turn to and with no authentic agendas set forth by the Sudanese government to help its people, a number of civil wars have been fought in Sudan since its liberation from the British and Egyptian rule in 1956, which led simultaneously to the split between the North and the South. Since then, South Sudan has been plagued with ongoing tribal clashes, interethnic warfare, frequent sexual violence, abduction, and terrorization by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). [1: Charlene Porter, “Global Refugee Movement Reaches a High Mark,” IIP Digital, 19 June 2013, http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/article/2013/06/20130619276882.html#axzz2eAuOGDQb. [Accessed September 6, 2013]]

Today, with the gross-human rights violations taking place in the two Sudans, many experts and commentators have urged governments from international states to take positive action to address the root causes of the forced displacement in these two states. Given the dire situations in the two Sudans, the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium was held in an effort to foster dialogue between various stakeholders and noted experts to discuss, to exchange ideas, and to brainstorm cross-sectoral solutions to the present social, economic, and political challenges in the two Sudans. In addition, the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium was established in an effort to construct a safe space for these noted practitioners and policy-makers to develop an informal network that can further the goals of achieving practical and reasonable actions, initiatives, and programs to address the two Sudan’s challenges.

Overview of the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium and Evaluation Report

By organizing the Symposium through a series of carefully planned and selected themes, and by structuring the Symposium through both open and closed panel session, much of the Planning Committee’s initial objectives have shown promising results in the responses received from the participants. Of significance was the overall positive responses received from participants who had complimented the array of prominent and influential scholars, researchers and policy-makers present at the Symposium, including, a senior jurist from Africa and a representative of the UNHCR. Indeed, we were most fortunate to have Dr. Francis M. Deng, Ambassador, South Sudan Permanent Representative to the United Nations, and former Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide and Mass Atrocities, United Nations, New York City, United States of America, as our official keynote speaker. In addition, given the local and international media attention that was directed towards the launch of the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium, as many as 70 participants were able to attend the Symposium. The breakdown of participants was as follows:

Male

Female

Justices/Judges/Decision-Makers

3

3

Academics/Legal Scholars

18

12

6

UNHCR

1

1

Undergraduate, Graduate Students

2

1

1

Others

6

5

1

Many of these participants had admitted to having learnt a great deal during their three-day engagement, and many others had been especially keen on furthering the relationships they have developed with the other participants. Most notably were those who had expressed their interest in becoming a part of a Sudan/South Sudan network and assisting with the implementation of peace-building strategies for the protracted humanitarian crises there. The overall results of these experiences can be demonstrated in the data shown in the tables and graphs below.

In addition to building on the objectives of the Symposium, further developments in the post-Symposium period can also be seen in the latest expansions and additions to the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium website. Having been designed as an educational tool and networking feature, these new and innovative developments in the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium website now include an interactive blog for interested users and a Youtube channel that consists of all the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium public panel sessions. To date, there are already 62 subscribers to this channel. Simultaneous reports, blogs, and Symposium images have also been published and posted for public viewing. Further publications of the Symposium academic journal articles and policy and program outcomes will be posted in due time. For additional information on the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium interactive blog or Youtube channel, and for a complete listing of the Symposium presenters and participants, please visit our website at http://www.yorku.ca/soss/index.html.

Demonstratively, given the overall achievements of the Symposium, the purpose of this evaluation report is to highlight some of these positive outcomes as well as highlight our Symposium participants’ suggestions. Further, the purpose of this evaluation report is to assist with any and all future follow-up plans and strategies, including the possibility of forming a Sudan/South Sudan research network. More information on the Symposium’s significance and results can be seen in the following sections. Additionally, more information on the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium’s background, programme, and discussion topics can be found on our website at http://www.yorku.ca/soss/index.html.

The Sudan/South Sudan Symposium Evaluation Form and Responses

The Sudan/South Sudan Symposium participants were given an evaluation form to complete at the end of the symposium day. The evaluation forms were completely anonymous and confidential. Completed evaluation forms were collected at the end of the symposium. The evaluation forms were kept as simple as possible to allow participants to be able to complete the form easily and quickly. Participants were requested to respond to a series of open ended questions, focusing on several key topics. These included questions that were based on the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium’s organization and logistics, the programme, the presentations, the website and online materials, and an overall assessment of the symposium.

Based on the participant responses, the following tables and graphs have been structured through an ordinal scale system to better assist with understanding the nature of the symposium. The ordinal scale that has been constructed for the purpose of this report is as follows:

Very Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied

Very Dissatisfied

Not Applicable

Within the span of three-days, fourteen completed evaluation forms were received from the Symposium’s participants. It is important to point out all those who were either closely involved in the organization of the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium and the student volunteers were excluded from completing the evaluation form. This was done for obvious reasons, that is, specifically, to avoid any possible apprehension of bias with respect to the completion of the evaluation forms and the statistical results.

The Sudan/South Sudan Symposium participants’ responses to these questions are presented in the tables and bar graphs found immediately below.

Table 1

Participant’s Responses to the Symposium’s Organization and Logistics

Could you please let us know what you thought of the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium arrangements? Were you satisfied with the conference set up, meals, networking breaks, and the conference materials and so on? What did we do well and what could we have done better in your opinion?

Based on the participant responses, eleven had stated that they were very satisfied with the symposium’s organization and logistics while only three had stated being satisfied. Respondents who had responded with nothing but positive feedback was ranked accordingly as very satisfied. Respondents who had mostly positive responses were placed in the satisfied category.

Based on the feedback received on what participants liked the most about the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium arrangements, most participants had agreed that the set-up and selection of participants and topics discussed were very “informative and lively”. One participant in particular had thought the structure of the symposium was very “well-thought through”. Other participants had also agreed that the networking breaks were very “plentiful” and that they were also “refreshing and relaxing”. On top of these two aspects, at least four others had praised the food catering, organized by our symposium planning committee.

Aside from these successes, some participants felt that there were areas that could have been improved upon. Amongst the three, two participants felt that the Symposium would have been better if Ambassador Dr. Francis Deng could have attended the full three days. The third participant stated that “if parking had been provided it would have helped the participants to be on time [with] the meetings”.

Table 2

Participant’s Responses to the Symposium’s Programme and Presentations

Based on an analysis of the second question, there were a total of 9 participants who responded to the first question with very positive remarks. Many respondents had praised the relevancy of the topics discussed and covered, while others were generally impressed with the stimulating discussions that were a direct result of the variety of speakers present at the symposium. Two respondents were also satisfied with the time allotment for the presentations and discussions.

There were two satisfied responses, though one such response had mentioned feeling uncomfortable speaking during the small collective discussions period because they were new to the issue. Another participant had suggested that discussions and presentations would have been more stimulating if there were at least “one or two representatives from each government” so to present their expertise and standing on the issues at hand.

And finally, two participants had specified feeling dissatisfied with the program and time allocation. One, in particular, had felt that the time allocation for discussions was too short and had suggested that presentation times should “increase by five minutes”. The second participant had mentioned that though the “topics were good… [they were] perhaps sometimes [too] broad”.

Responses to the second question showed very positive results; all expressing high levels of satisfaction, with 12 participants feeling very satisfied with the discussions, presentations, and debates, and only 2 seeing areas of improvement needed.

Based on the respondent’s answers, most participants were pleased with the range, variation, and complexity of topics covered in the two days. Some had even expressed gratitude for the helpful and informative sessions as well. One participant, in particular, had felt that the symposium did a great job covering the broad issues in the two Sudans given the limited time we had in the course of the three-day event.

While many responses were positive, one participant had suggested that more attention should be “paid to addressing the poor causes of the IDPs crisis and strategies to address them… [and that] a [separate plenary session] might be needed for that”. Another participant also expressed their satisfaction towards the diverse items covered, but also suggested that “for technical groups” a concept paper that “frames the issues under discussion and the suggested solutions” should be developed and distributed for the benefit of furthering the symposium goals.

Table 3

Participant’s Responses to the Symposium’s Website and Online Material

Please give us your opinion of how useful you found our Sudan/South Sudan Symposium Conference website. Did you find that the website included the information you needed to prepare for the conference? What did you find the most useful on the website and why?

This third evaluation question asked the participants to specify whether they have had the opportunity to visit the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium website, and if they had, they were to answer the follow-up question. Out of the 14 participants who had submitted the symposium evaluation forms, only 9 had stated that had the opportunity to visit the website. Their answers were positive, with only one answer that was not applicable.

Many of the participants found that the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium website was very useful, organized, and that it had all the information they needed for the three-day event. Others had commented on the easy navigation of the website, while three other participants had commented on the array of information that the website provided on the background information on the issues. One participant in particular had noted that “visiting the website was part of [their] motivation to attend the symposium”.

Table 4

Participant’s Overall Assessment

How would rate your experience at the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium overall? Did it meet your expectations? What did you like the most and what did you like the least about the conference? Would you like to attend any other conferences, workshops or seminars on this same topic in the future?

The last question on the evaluation form assessed the participant’s overall experience. The responses to this question varied, with nine stating very positive remarks, 2 satisfied remarks, 1 neutral, and 1 that was not applicable.

Based on the participant responses, many had stated that not only had the symposium met their expectations, many had also admitted to it exceeding their initial expectations as well. One participant in particular had applauded the symposium for being a “powerful initiative in discussing [the] issues related to [the] humanitarian situation[s] in Sudan and South Sudan”. While another had stated the symposium was “amazing, fabulous, lively, informative and lastly sociable”.

Another area that the participants had commended on was the overall professionalism of the symposium and the level of knowledge and expertise displayed by the participants. One participant had admitted to have “learnt a great deal” at this three-day event.

One participant had also expressed satisfaction with the symposium’s professionalism and though-provoking sessions too. Given the success of this symposium, this participant had also suggested that this symposium should be relocated to other settings and in other parts of the world that have are experiencing greater numbers of IDP movement.

Summary of the Evaluation Forms Completed and Submitted by Hand at the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium

As evidenced in the results shown above, the three-day Sudan/South Sudan Symposium proved to be a great success. With the odd exception that some participants felt that the time allotment and presentation topics being too broad and/or too limited, the overall results have demonstrated the participants’ overall contentment with the symposium’s organization and logistics, programme and presentations, and the website and online material. Consequently, although some participants expressed their concern with the limited time Ambassador Dr. Francis Deng had with the participants, this slight inconvenience was made up for by the array of practitioners, policy-makers, scholars, and researchers present that helped make the symposium an informative, lively, and memorable experience for all.

The evident success of the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium can be further demonstrated in the following assessment.

The Sudan/South Sudan Symposium Online Evaluation

During the planning of the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium it was agreed that it may be prudent to also have an online questionnaire to allow the participants to offer their views some weeks after the symposium had taken place. Accordingly, an online questionnaire was prepared and widely distributed via e-mail to all such participants who have listed their emails in the morning sign-in sheets. It is important to note that this online questionnaire was only distributed to those who were in attendance, with the exception of the planning committee members, hired Research Assistants, and student volunteers.

The participants were given a few weeks to complete these questionnaires. A total of 13 participants had responded and completed the questionnaires, and the following is an assessment of their responses to the ten questions asked.

Question 1

It has now been several weeks since our Sudan/South Sudan Symposium. Can you recall any part(s) of the Symposium that you might say has had a lasting impact on you?

In the 13 responses that we had received from participants, it would appear that three specific aspects of the Symposium had the most lasting impact on the participants. Ranking as the most memorable aspect of the Symposium, four participants had mentioned the keynote address and other presentations given by Ambassador Dr. Francis Deng as having the most lasting impact on them. Based on their answers, these participants had been especially astonished by Ambassador Deng’s knowledge of the historical background, the ongoing sociopolitical conflicts, and humanitarian parameters experienced by the IDPs and the people of the two Sudans.

In other responses, some had also acknowledged the lasting impact that the plenary sessions had on them. More specifically, these participants had separately pointed out specific plenary sessions that had the most impact, including Plenary Session 1, Understanding the Extent and Nature of the Humanitarian Crisis in Sudan and South Sudan, and Plenary Session 4, Investing in Sustainable Development and Livelihoods.

Two participants had mentioned being very grateful and impressed with the many Sudanese diasporas who had made an appearance to the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium. The Q&A sessions, in particular, had proven to be a great opportunity for many to hear the voices and perspectives of these Sudanese participants. One respondent had noted that these Sudanese participants had “brought the issues ’back home’ to the local level”.

Other areas of the Symposium that had received some recognition included the “selection of academic experts, policy makers, activists, and related experts”, the discussions on the “engagement of gender dynamics in post-conflict societies”, and the discussions on the role of women in the conflict.

Question 2

The Sudan/South Sudan Symposium had open public sessions in the morning and closed technical working group meetings in the afternoon. Please let us know what you thought of this format and structural design. Was it effective in exploring the issues under examination and were the technical working group meetings effective in addressing these concerns in further depth and detail and in search of practical medium and long-term solutions?

As shown in the table above, four participants had stated to being very satisfied with the overall structural design and format of the Symposium. In their responses, they were especially impressed by the effectiveness it has provided in exploring and addressing the issues under examination. Some highlights that were especially brought to attention, by these participants, included the diverse make-up of the conference attendees that helped foster an accepting and open environment for discussions and debates, the well-structured open and closed sessions which help make the proceedings more productive, and the excellent work provided by the facilitators that enabled very interesting discussions about the solutions and strategies in addressing the major challenges in the two Sudans. Overall, their experiences have been very rewarding and have allowed them to better understand the problems at hand.

While the majority of the comments received by participants had been positive, there were still a few who had thought that some form of change was necessary. For those who had found the event mostly satisfactory, they mentioned being dissatisfied with the limited time allotment for discussions, impractical plenary sessions, and with being unable to attend the technical working group meetings that were closed to the public.

In the first instance, many had expressed the difficulty in reaching any sustainable and practical solutions given the limited time given to these discussions. The second reason for this dissatisfaction was also due to the impractical solutions that the speakers in the plenary sessions were using to address the challenges and concerns in the two Sudans. According to one participant, it appeared as though “some presenters [had] tried to influence the participants in one direction or another”.

Poor advertising was also presented as another reason that affected the impracticality of the public sessions, since insufficient publicity seemed to be generated. And, the last reason for participant’s dissatisfaction was the fact that many were unable to attend all of the closed technical meetings. Because of this format, some participants had felt isolated from the Symposium discussions and were left wondering what actually happened behind the closed doors.

Question 3

Were you satisfied with how your technical working group meetings dealt with the specific issues that they were assigned to address at the Symposium? Were you satisfied with the solutions and/or recommendations that your group(s) made to the Symposium?

* Only 8 out of the 13 participants were able to respond to this question. This number may have been influenced in part due to the fact that the technical working groups were closed sessions.

In an analysis of the first set of responses, while participants had expressed differing levels of satisfaction, the overall consensus was that they were satisfied with their technical working group meetings. In some responses, participants had commended the arrangement of the groups which allowed for the exchange of differing views. One participant had stated that they have “learned a lot from the exchanges and different perspectives”. Other participants had also expressed their satisfaction towards the “style and knowledge” of the moderators and the directions provided by the speakers. Despite these positive reviews, however, one participant had stated that while they were satisfied with the topics discussed, their overall experience was “average” due to the limited number of participants in the groups that greatly affected their ability to reach any viable solutions and objectives.

In review of the second set of responses, greater variation can be seen with the results shown above. For those who had stated that they were very satisfied with the solutions and/or recommendations developed by their groups, one said that such solutions “could be shared with the governments concerned, as well as humanitarian partners involved in provision or succor to the population in need”.

While many had commended the overall success of their technical working groups, some were still wary of the limited time available for these discussions. For these participants, they had noted the impossibility of achieving any serious and sufficient solutions due to the time restrictions, while others have noted the difficulty in delving into any further meaningful and important issues and concerns due to the time allotments.

Consequently, while it was agreed generally by all participants that the technical working groups wwere a success, one in particular was dissatisfied with the solutions and/or recommendations generated in these discussions. This participant had noted that these solutions were too theoretical and did not seem practical. Further, this participant felt that all viable solutions must be implemented through agencies such as “CIDA, USAID and JICA”. In the participant’s view, no working technical group based solely on theoretical discussions can achieve practical solutions.

Question 4

Have you visited the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium website at any point after the symposium?

Out of the 13 participants who had responded to this question, only 9 had visited the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium website after the Symposium. The next additional four questions were based on these 9 participant’s responses.

1. How often have you visited the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium website since the Symposium was held in the first week of July?

Based on the responses from these 9 participants, the answers varied from one time up to six times. One participant had noted visiting the website once after the symsposium, and another participant had noted visiting it twice. A total of four participants had noted visiting the website 3 times, and one had stated visiting it 6 times after the Symposium. Subsequently, one participant had noted visiting it “severeal times”, but no specific number was listed.

2. Why have you visited the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium website?

Out of the 9 responses that we have received from the participants who had visited the Symposium website, nearly 42% of these participants had stated visiting the website in the hope of finding more information on follow-up discussion papers, articles, and/or summaries of the presentations and debates during the three-day event.

With regards to finding more background information, materials and resources on the humanitarian crisis in Sudan/South Sudan, 25% of the participants had stated wanting to obtain more information in this respect.

Subsequently, 16.6% of the participants had noted visiting the website for networking purposes, and the last 16.6% of the participants were divided into either visiting for the purpose of looking at the Symposium pictures or for directional and programme purposes.

3. Have you visited our Sudan/South Sudan Symposium blog on our website? If so, what did you like about the blog? Was there anything that you found to be particularly effective about the blog? What, if anything, do you think should be added to the blog?

Four out of nine participants had responded that they had visited the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium blog on the website. With the exception of two responses, the other two respondents had noted that the blogs seemed either inactive or did not contain the specific materials that they had hoped to see. One such response had noted that “at the time [of their visit] it did not contain any of the videos that [the Symposium planning committee had] promised to upload”. But on a more positive note, one participant did mention that the online blogs were very “easy to navigate and find the information [that they had] wanted to see”. And another participant also noted that the blogs were “good”.

For those who were unable to visit the blog, many had expressed not knowing that such a feature existed. Based on one response that was received, the participant had noted that “[their] generation is [still] learning about [the] blogging culture”. Perhaps in due time this feature will garner more attention as more people are exposed to web blogs and other online social media features.

4. Is there anything else that you would like to see added to this website? If so, what else would you like to see on the website and why?

Of the nine participants who had visited the Symposium website, only three had offered additional comments and suggestions for the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium website. According to their responses, they would like to see the following additions to the website:

“The synopsis of the papers/discussions”

“Comments by the main participants”

“Video sessions of the closed technical group meetings”

Question 5

Would you be interested in getting involved with a Sudan and South Sudan researchers, practitioners, advocates, instructors, and students’ network? If so, explain why you would be interested in joining such a network?

Listed in the above table are the 6 categories which the participants had identified with. The participants’ answers ranged from either being interested in the field, being interested in knowledge sharing, being interested in wanting to gain more understanding into the humanitarian issues faced by the two Sudans, being interested in networking for the purpose of strengthening advocacy efforts, and/or a general interest in redirecting current advocacy focuses.

With the exception of two participants who were not interested, and one other non-applicable answer, many had expressed varying levels of interests in the idea of getting involved with a Sudan and South Sudan researchers, practitioners, advocates, instructors, and students’ network.

Of the thirteen respondents, almost half of the participants had expressed an interest in the field. Participant 1, 2, 6, 7 and 12, in particular, had noted their interest in this field due to their ongoing research and work in Africa and their focus on the aftermath of the Southern and Northern Sudanese referendum and independence. Participant 6 and 7, in particular, had expressed an interest in networking for the purpose of expanding their knowledge and to share their intensive experience and expertise with other researchers, scholars, and practitioners alike with hopes of strengthening all advocacy initiatives.

Other notable reasons that participants had stated was the chance to expand their research focus through being engaged with other experts in the area and gaining fresh perspectives on the problems and potential solutions. Another reason that was provided by the participants was their faith in the idea of networking for the purpose of strengthening advocacy efforts and as a means for better change.

Amongst the other explanations provided by the participants however, one participant had noted that they would be interested in getting involved in this network only if “there was a focus on refugee or emerging refugee law”. All remaining responses were either not interested or not applicable.

Question 6

Would you like to add any further thoughts or comments?

In reflection of the participant’s overall Sudan/South Sudan Symposium experience, only seven out of 13 participants had left a final note. And of these seven, only one participant had stated that some areas of change were needed. According to this participant, the plights experienced by the people of the two Sudans would have been better addressed had there been more representatives in related fields invited to the Symposium. This includes “government officials directly involved in relevant affairs … practitioners from humanitarian agencies and NGOs with country-specific experience on the main subjects of discussion”.

Aside from this one comment, many of the final comments submitted by the participants were thank you notes directly addressed to the Symposium planning committee and student volunteers. In particular, these participants had left very positive notes on the overall success of the Symposium’s keynote address and reception, the organization and logistics of this three-day event, the publicity generated by the morning plenary sessions, and their well-structured presentations. And to commemorate this success, one participant had stated that it would be wise to have another Sudan/South Sudan Symposium in the future, and if not, the discussions and relationships created through this three-day event should be continued through online networking.

Conclusions

As evidenced in the overall comments expressed by many of the participants, it can be concluded that the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium was a great success. Amongst many of these achievements, a few areas had received greater attention than others. These areas of success included the participant’s overall positive responses to Ambassador Francis Deng’s presence and contributions in the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium, the overall structure of the Symposium and choice of programming, and the array of participants who had been invited to participate in the Symposium as speakers or facilitators. As evidenced in the results above, whether in the first set of responses taken from the first evaluation forms or from the online evaluation forms, it can be noted that these areas had received the most significant amount of positive responses in comparison to the other reactions. In particular, many had also pointed out that they have learnt a lot from the array of participants invited to the conference and from the display of topics that were discussed in detail at the open and closed sessions.

Further, it can be noted that while only 9 out of 14 participants in the first evaluation form were able to visit the Symposium website, the results in the second evaluation forms had shown a 5% increase in attendance, with 9 out of 13 participants having visited the Sudan/South Sudan website and blog.

It is clear from their responses that their purpose for visiting the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium website has also changed too. While the first set of responses had only indicated an interest in the Sudan/South Sudan background information and programming and directional information, the latter responses had indicated an overall interest in the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium materials and resources, articles and discussion summaries, and above all, many had also indicated an interest in finding out more about the other participants in the Symposium. Their interest in this area can be further evidenced in Question 5, “would you be interested in getting involved with a Sudan and South Sudan researchers, practitioners, advocates, instructors, and students’ network?” where, 76% of the participants had responded positively to wanting to be a part of this network

Given the overall responses from the participants, many changes have been made since the end of the three-day Symposium to further the goals and initiatives first developed by the Symposium planning committee. Amongst many of these changes include the implementation of the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium blog, which many of the participants had admitted to have visited and are currently following. Further additions to the development of a research network have also included the creation of the Refugeeresearch YouTube channel. Additional post-Symposium reports, background material, and photographs can also be found on our Sudan/South Sudan Symposium website.

Through an analysis of the overall responses generated from the participants, it can be concluded that the Sudan/South Sudan Symposium had been successful in achieving the goals they had initially set out. And with many indicating an interest in becoming a part of a Sudan/South Sudan research network, it is clear that many early peace-building initiatives have begun to take off. The Sudan/South Sudan Symposium planning committee will stay committed to all future initiatives in order to bring peace and justice to the two Sudans.

Column1Very SatisfiedSatisfiedNeutralVery DissatisfiedDissatisfiedN/A114Were you satisfied with the topics covered, the flow of the overall programme, the time allocated for question and discussion, the level of the debate and discussions, and the presentations, both individually and collectively?Very SatisfiedSatisfiedNeutralVery DissatisfiedDissatisfied9212Did you find the discussions, presentations, and debates in this symposium helpful in your passage to understanding of the current humanitarian crises within Sudan/South Sudan? Was there anything you would have liked to see covered in the programme?Very SatisfiedSatisfiedNeutralVery DissatisfiedDissatisfied122Column1Very SatisfiedSatisfiedNeutralVery DissatisfiedDissatisfiedN/A81Column1Very SatisfiedSatisfiedNeutralVery DissatisfiedDissatisfiedN/A9211Column1Ambassador Francis Deng's Keynote Address/PresentationsOpen Plenary Sessions/Closed Technical Working GroupsHearing the Perspective from Sudanese Participants432Column1Very SucessfulMostly SucessfulNot SucessfulN/A4612Were you satisfied with how your technical working group meetings dealt with the specific issues that were assigned to address the symposium?Very SatisfiedSatisfiedNeutralVery DissatisfiedDissatisfied251Were you satisfied with the solutions and/or recommendations that your group(s) made to the Symposium?Very SatisfiedSatisfiedNeutralVery DissatisfiedDissatisfied2213Series 1YesNo94Column1Background Materials & ResourcesFollow-Up Materials/Articles/Discussion SummariesParticipant bios and Contact InfoDirections and ProgramsSymposium Photos35211Participant 1Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot Interested1Participant 2Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot Interested11Participant 3Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot Interested1Participant 4Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot Interested1Participant 5Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot Interested1Participant 6Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot Interested1111Participant 7Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot Interested111Participant 8Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot Interested1Participant 9Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot Interested1Participant 10Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot Interested11Participant 11Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot InterestedParticipant 12Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot Interested11Participant 13Pursuit out of InterestKnowledge SharingTo Gain Better UnderstandingNetworking to Strengthen AdvocacyRedirecting Advocacy FocusNot Interested11